Justice  Mr. Speaker, I have full confidence in our judicial and parliamentary institutions. The process was designed to make sure that the defendant had every opportunity to access the information relevant to his case and to challenge any decision not to disclose part or all of some document.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the case to which the hon. member referred was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which is independent from the government and independent from the Department of Justice. My office had no role whatsoever in the handling of this prosecution. That includes the decision to lay charges and the decision to stay charges, as well as the prosecution in-between.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I remind the hon. member that the government met all of its obligations with respect to the third party records applications. All documents in this case for priority individuals identified in February by the defence were provided to the court, over 8,000 documents from seven different departments.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the government met all of its obligations with respect to the third party records applications. All documents in this case for priority individuals identified in February by the defence were provided to the court as required. During this case, more than 8,000 documents from this government organization were submitted to the court.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, my department's only involvement was to provide government records in response to a request from the defence to help support the defence of Vice-Admiral Norman. The Department of Justice processed these 52 requests on behalf of seven departments. The process of determining whether documents were relevant and whether any redactions were necessary was made and conducted by civil servants and then verified by the court.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, there were requests from the court, and we provided the court with more than 8,000 documents from seven different government agencies. In fact, the court complimented us on our co-operation in this matter. The decision to redact those documents was made not by the government but by an apolitical agency.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, all the various premises of that question are categorically false. The Department of Justice co-operated with the court in order to provide the requested documents. The documents that were requested were given, more than 8,000 of them from seven different agencies.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, it is a curious question with an accusation that is baseless. In fact, in this particular case, the PPSC was acting independently of the federal government because the supervisory role in this case, under the Criminal Code, was actually held by the Attorney General for Ontario.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the investigation in question was led by the RCMP, an institution that we, in Canada, are very proud of. The RCMP turned the evidence it collected over to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, another institution that we are very proud of. This was a criminal prosecution led by the director of the Public Prosecution Service and she was the one who decided to stay the charges.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. As we have said a number of times on this side of the House, we have full faith in our institutions in Canada. The charges in question were laid by the prosecution service by the director of public prosecutions. The process was managed by the prosecution service of Canada, and the stay was decided by the prosecution service of Canada.

Justice  Madam Speaker, as I have said a number of times in this House and outside this House, it is the RCMP that investigates in such matters. The RCMP investigated and turned evidence over to the prosecution service. It is the prosecution service of Canada, which operates independently of government, that evaluated the evidence and decided to lay charges, proceeded with the trial and ultimately decided to stay charges.

Justice  Madam Speaker, the premise of that question is entirely false. As the director of public prosecutions has said on at least two occasions, as the prosecutor in question has said, there was no political interference in this case; there was no political interference in the decision to lay charges; there was no political interference in the decision to stay charges; and there was no political interference over the course of the trial.

Justice  Madam Speaker, I would like to remind the House that the Department of Justice co-operated with the court for the production of documents. We are talking about over 8,000 documents from seven different government agencies. The decision to redact is made independently of political bodies.

Justice  Madam Speaker, as I just said, we are talking about over 8,000 documents from seven different government agencies. We co-operated with the court. We produced the documents in question. The decision to redact is made independently of political bodies. In short, we co-operated, the system worked and we are proud of Canada's judicial system.

Justice  Madam Speaker, we have full confidence in our government institutions, and they all functioned very well in this case. The RCMP investigated and laid charges. The investigation, the decision to lay charges and the prosecution were handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, as was the decision to stay charges.